The wrath of Kam

Kamala Harris sat for an interview by Bret Baier for Special Report on Fox News yesterday. I have posted the video below. Baier was, well, loaded for bear. I thought he did an excellent job within the time allowed. I have just a few thoughts and observations.

This was Harris’s first interview on Fox News. I take it that her appearance in this venue is a sign that her campaign is not going altogether swimmingly.

The interview was something of a calculated risk. Harris’s handlers have heretofore kept her from close encounters of the Fox News kind. They know she can’t defend her record or espouse the views that she has advocated over the years in the course of her career, as in her 2020 presidential campaign.

How did it go? I don’t think she’ll be returning to Fox News any time soon. Harris arrived late to the interview and her handlers sought to shut it down early. When Harris raised her voice and showed anger at Baier, I thought I would not want to be the staffer who urged her to do this interview. One could feel the wrath of Kam.

Baier sought to get her off the talking points she has used to evade the discovery or exposure of her views. On each question but her critique of Donald Trump, Harris undertook predictable evasive maneuvers — predictable mostly because we have heard them before. Harris’s object was to resist a candid statement of her views. The interview was therefore contentious.

Baier first addressed the subject of immigration. When Harris sought to unburden herself of what has been — what has been, that is, under her watch. Baier sought an accounting. It did not go well for her. Baier served as the voice of the reality principle.

She is the incumbent vice president of an unpopular administration. Reality is the underlying problem for her campaign with its themes of turning the page and a new way forward. She wants to run as the candidate of Hope and Change campaign, Obama style, but she represents a present of which most of the country disapproves.

She has stood for every cause championed by the radical left. Her proud advocacy of taxpayer-funded sex change surgery for illegal aliens in detention is the classic example. When Baier raised it, Harris sought to trace it to…Donald Trump.

“I will follow the law and it’s a law that Donald Trump actually followed,” she said. “I think frankly that ad from the Trump campaign [featuring Harris advocating the cause] is a little bit of throwing stones when you’re living in a glass house,” she added. “You have to take responsible [sic] for what happened in your administration.”

No one believes that Trump supports sex change surgery for illegal aliens in detention. That is a ridiculous point. Harris herself has supported it. In her own case, however, she doesn’t take responsibility. The buck always stop somewhere else.

Harris’s vow to “follow the law” constituted yet another evasion of responsibility for her own previously stated views. If she were to be elected president, she made it sound like she would be a bystander.

Baier pressed Harris on her observation of Biden’s declining mental faculties in the context of her public statements to the contrary. She evaded the question as usual. “Trump is on the ballot,” she observed.

Trump is also the subject of two ongoing prosecutions by the Biden — the Biden-Harris — administration. It is the current administration that would have its foremost political opponent put behind bars.

I don’t think any persuadable or undecided voter would incline to Harris based on her performance with Baier yesterday. What does she think? What does she believe? What is her position? She devoted all her skill, such as it is, to concealment. She would prefer not to let us know. The persuadable voter is more likely to infer that there is a good reason she seeks to keep her views under wraps before election day.